In i4i Case, High Court Pitches 8-0 Shutout Against Microsoft

No, it’s not the collective sound of the Chicago Cubs, who, in 2011, are gasping for air even sooner than usual. This sound comes from a bit farther west — Redmond, Wash., to be precise — where higher ups at Microsoft just got word that they lost bigtime at the U.S. Supreme Court in a highly watched patent battle against a Toronto-based technology company called i4i.

The high court on Thursday, in an opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, upheld by an 8-0 vote a $290 million patent-infringement verdict against Microsoft, rejecting the company’s bid to make it harder for companies to bring patent claims against it. Click here for the WSJ story; here for the opinion itself; here for coverage from Scotusblog.

Microsoft had appealed to the high court in a case involving its Word software program, arguing that i4i shouldn’t have won a jury verdict regarding a patent claim related to document editing. I4i obtained a $290 million judgment against Microsoft, as well as an injunction that barred sales of certain versions of Word said to infringe the patent.

The Supreme Court said a challenge to a patent claim “requires an invalidity defense to be proved by clear and convincing evidence.” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing the main opinion, said Congress set the standard in a 1952 patent law and that any “calibration of the standard of proof remains in its hands.”

In other words: you got a problem with this, take it up with Congress, not us.

Microsoft said it was disappointed in the ruling. “While the outcome is not what we had hoped for, we will continue to advocate for changes to the law that will prevent abuse of the patent system,” a company spokesman said in a statement.

The case had split the business community, with drug makers and manufacturers such as 3M and Johnson & Johnson arguing the patent law change sought by Microsoft would harm innovation by inventors. Technology companies, however, face a stream of lawsuits involving patent claims, prompting Google, Verizon and others to back Microsoft’s bid before the high court that would make it harder for third-party patent holders to sue successfully.

About Law Blog

The Law Blog covers the legal arena’s hot cases, emerging trends and big personalities. It’s brought to you by lead writer Jacob Gershman with contributions from across The Wall Street Journal’s staff. Jacob comes here after more than half a decade covering the bare-knuckle politics of New York State. His inside-the-room reporting left him steeped in legal and regulatory issues that continue to grab headlines.

Must Reads

First Amendment advocates and major media companies are urging a federal appeals court to throw out a defamation judgment against "American Sniper" author Chris Kyle that entitled former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura to more than $1 million of the royalties from the book.

A federal jury in Los Angeles on Tuesday ordered singers Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams to pay about $7.4 million to the family of Marvin Gaye, after finding the duo’s 2013 hit song “Blurred Lines” copied parts of Mr. Gaye’s “Got to Give it Up.”